A trader at AIB's US arm hid almost US$700 million of currency losses
Allied Irish Banks (Allfirst) · Banking (listed)
The case in brief
Visible before detection
Checks that could have surfaced it, on hindsight
Third-party confirmation
Would have confirmed trades with counterparties.
Can mislead when: Counterparties can collude or ignore requests. A non-response is logged as a gap, never as a pass.
Document authenticity / direct pull
Would have pulled confirmations directly.
Can mislead when: The company can refuse consent, and a refusal is itself a flag. Some banks and co-op banks are not on AA yet.
Governance signals
Would have reviewed segregation of duties.
Can mislead when: Private companies file late, so these signals are lagging. Kubr uses them to support other flags, not to prove anything alone.
Where Kubr services would have helped
IC note
Offered in India- C5 Would have pulled confirmations directly.
- C11 Would have reviewed segregation of duties.
Verified Snapshot
Offered in India- C11 Would have reviewed segregation of duties.
Financial diligence
Offered in India- C5 Would have pulled confirmations directly.
Legal diligence support
Offered in India- C11 Would have reviewed segregation of duties.
Mapped from the checks each service runs. A hindsight reading of public records, not a promise that the failure would have been found.
Same pattern
A summary of public documents. It reports what the sources say. It is not Kubr's finding and not a statement of guilt.